Comparison of biofilm removal using glycine air polishing versus sodium bicarbonate air polishing or hand instrumentation on full-arch fixed implant rehabilitations: a split-mouth study

Objectives: To compare the cleaning efficacy of glycine air polishing against two different professional oral hygiene techniques on implants supporting full-arch fixed prostheses. Method and materials: Thirty patients with a total of 32 implant fixed full-arch rehabilitations in the maxilla and/or mandible (134 implants) were included. After the removal of the screw-retained prostheses, baseline peri-implant spontaneous bleeding (SB), Plaque Index (PI), probing depth (PD), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded (T0). Three oral hygiene treatments were assigned randomly following a split-mouth method: all the patients received glycine air polishing (G) in one side of the arch (n = 32), and sodium bicarbonate air polishing (B) (n = 16) or manual scaling with carbon-fiber curette (C) (n = 16) was performed in the opposite side. After the hygiene procedures, PI and SB were recorded and patient's comfort degree towards the three techniques was analyzed by questionnaires using a rating scale from 1 to 5 (T1). Results: PI reduction was significantly higher for G (T0, 2.88 ± 1.37; T1, 0.04 ± 0.21) and B (T0, 3.13 ± 1.34; T1, 0.0 ± 0.0) as compared with C (T0, 2.15 ± 1.46; T1, 0.44 ± 0.7) (P .001). B reported the highest mean value of SB (T0, 0.0 ± 0.0; T1, 3.42 ± 0.75) compared with G (T0, 0.05 ± 0.21; T1, 1.60 ± 1.05) and C (T0, 0.07 ± 0.24; T1, 0.73 ± 0.91) (P .001). A significant difference in comfort mean score was found between G (4.8 ± 0.5) and B (3.5 ± 1.7) (P = .014), no difference between G and C (4.7 ± 0.7) (P = .38). Conclusion: Professional oral hygiene on implants using glycine air polishing showed high levels of both cleaning efficacy and patients' acceptance. Schlagwörter: dental implants, full-arch, glycine air polishing, oral hygiene, sodium bicarbonate air polishing